Home / TMT / Reputation management / Defamation

Legal News

Article in Riley defamation claim held to be defamatory in part (Riley and another v Heybroek)

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published on: 20 May 2020
Published by a LexisNexis TMT expert

Table of contents

  • What was the background?
  • What did the court decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

TMT analysis: In this defamation case, the High Court has ruled on the meaning of the words complained of within an article that concerned the television presenter Rachel Riley and the actress Tracy-Ann Oberman. It held that the words complained of consisted of both statements of fact and opinion and were defamatory in part.

Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom

Related documents:

4 News
View More
5 Practice notes
View More
3 Q&As
View More
Powered by Lexis+®

Related documents:

4 News
View More
5 Practice notes
View More
3 Q&As
View More

Popular documents

Defamation—defences

Defamation—defencesDefencesThere are a number of substantive defences to a defamation claim, the majority of which are now, since the Defamation Act 2013 (DA 2013), statutory. Any number of defences may be relied upon together in answer to a claim.TruthThere is a presumption that defamatory words

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?

What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some